1 2025:CGHC:34398 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3770 of 2025 1 - Ramadhar S/o Chhabilal Aged About 55 Years R/o Village Ranpota, Tahsil- Malkharoda, Distt. Janjgir-Champa (C.G.), At Present Distt. Sakti (C.G.) 2 - Shyamlal S/o Muni Lal Aged About 49 Years R/o Village Ranpota, Tahsil- Malkharoda, Distt. Janjgir-Champa (C.G.), At Present Distt. Sakti (C.G.) 3 - Chhaturam S/o Dwasram Aged About 48 Years R/o Village Ranpota, Tahsil- Malkharoda, Distt. Janjgir-Champa (C.G.), At Present Distt. Sakti (C.G.) 4 - Ramshila S/o Awadhram Aged About 66 Years R/o Village Ranpota, Tahsil- Malkharoda, Distt. Janjgir-Champa (C.G.), At Present Distt. Sakti (C.G.) 5 - Pardeshi S/o Laharam Aged About 82 Years R/o Village Ranpota, Tahsil- Malkharoda, Distt. Janjgir-Champa (C.G.), At Present Distt. Sakti (C.G.) 6 - Kapil Sahu (Kapilnath) S/o Sukhiram Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Ranpota, Tahsil- Malkharoda, Distt. Janjgir-Champa (C.G.), At Present Distt. Sakti (C.G.) 7 - Hitesh S/o Late Rohit Sahu Aged About 34 Years R/o Village Mudhpar, Tahsil- Malkharoda, Distt. Janjgir-Champa (C.G.), At Present Distt. Sakti (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Public Works Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Collector Sakti, Distt. Sakti (C.G.) 4 - Sub Divisional Officer (R)/ Land Acquisition Officer Malkharoda, Distt. Sakti (C.G.) 5 - Executive Engineer Public Works Department, Division Champa, Distt. Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) ----Respondents 2 (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. F.S. Khare, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Satish Gupta, G.A. Hon’ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 21/07/2025 1. Counsel for the Petitioner prays for the following relief(s):- (i)That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ/order/direction, directing to the respondents to pay the compensation to the petitioners forthwith for their land which has been acquired for construction of road. (ii) That, if the Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records pertaining to petitioner’s matter. (iii)Any other relief which may be suitable in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be granted. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is aggrieved by the inaction of the respondents who have not paid the compensation of the land acquired for construction of Basantpur Parsada Ghoghari Road, despite of the facts that supplementary acquisition proceedings under Land Acquisition Act 2013 has been completed in year 2019. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that they are having agricultural land in village Ranpota, P.H.N. 18, R.N.M. and Tahsil Malkharoda, District Sakti. In the year 2014 as per notification dated 06.05.2014, the State Government acquired the land of village Ranpota for construction of Basantpur Parsada Ghoghari Raod. The compensation was paid to some of the Villagers of village Ranpota by award dated 30.03.2017 but land of present petitioners was left, thereafter vide order dated 20.06.2019, a 3 proposal for supplementary land acquisition proceeding was submitted before the respondent No. 3. On the basis thereof vide order dated 18.07.2019, the respondent No. 3 approved the supplementary and forwarded it to the respondent No. 4 for preparation of compensation. Thereafter the respondent No. 4 wrote several letters from 23.10.2019 to 22.12.2021 for depositing the compensation amount but till date nothing has been done and as such the petitioners are still deprived from payment of compensation for their land. Therefore, the petitioner made several representation dated 11.03.2025 & 12.03.2025 which is pending consideration and prays for a direction to decide the same and suitable compensation be provided to the petitioner. 4. Learned counsel for respondents submits that in view of the limited prayer made by the learned counsel for petitioner seeking direction to respondents to consider the pending representation towards payment of compensation, he is having no objection to the limited prayer and if the represenation of the petitioner is pending, it will be considered in accordance with law. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, instead of keeping this petition pending, this Court finds it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition at this stage directing the respondent No. 3, 4 & 5 to decide the pending representation of the petitioner (Annexure P/3) within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order in accordance with rules and regulations 4 governing the field. if it is found that the land of the petitioner has been used for construction Basantpur Parsada Ghoghar Road, necessary steps be taken for payment of compensation towards the land owned by the petitioner in accordance with law. 7. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Jyoti